 Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Board of Selection Meeting for Monday, May 12, 2014. It is a little past 7 o'clock, and I do call this meeting to order. Just a reminder that we are filming the meeting tonight, so just a heads up on that. To start off, number one, an introduction, Mr. Chaplain. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to just give the Board an opportunity to meet two guests that we're hosting in Arlington for the next two weeks as part of a cooperative program with the Mass Municipal Association and the State Department. We're hosting two municipal officials from Pakistan for the next two weeks, and we're going to visit with town departments, see the town, spend some time in the general area, and I wanted to have them here to meet you tonight. And they will also get to witness town meeting tonight, so they're in for a long night. So if you don't mind coming up, I'll introduce you to the Board. I'm sorry, can you come to the microphone? My name is Rukhsana Aziz, and I belong from Balochistan. That is the one state of Pakistan, and we are sharing border with Afghanistan and Iran. I'm working in education sector and basically working for Millennium Development Goals, in which including the universal primary education is the main goal, which we want to achieve till 2015, which is not looking so possible due to certain conditions, law and order issues. So still we are very far behind to that goals. And I also worked on women right and empowerment, and beside that, main focus is to involve the community in the education matters in Pakistan. And I'm covering, I'm working at a state level, and we have 31 districts in Balochistan, and we are focusing on all districts and build the capacity of education department officials and other line departments for achieving the goals of universal primary education. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. Welcome. Hello everyone. I'm Salam Zafar. I'm from the northern part of Pakistan, which is called Gilgit-Baldistan, and we are sharing borders with China. And I'm working in planning and development department in Gilgit-Baldistan. And I'm dealing the infrastructure sector and the road bridges and the buildings, everything. Great. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Welcome. Thank you for coming. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on. Approval, the consent agenda. Minutes of meeting, April 28, 2014. Vote, sale of wine at farmers market, 2014 applicant. Kipton-Kumler. Vote, sale of wine at farmers market, 2014 applicant. David Nielsen. Request, contracted drain layer license. Reappointment, controller. Request, permit for Memorial Day Parade. Request, Monday, May 26, 2014. And request for a one-day beer and wine license for May 28, 2014, at the Regent Theater for the fifth annual Ciclismo. Classico bike travel film festival. Sorry if I pronounce the name of that wrong. Move approval subject to all conditions. Is it set forth? Second. Any discussion? I don't know. I thought I saw Ms. Lewis out there. I don't know if she wanted to say a few words. Hi, Ruth. Ruth Lewis, Comptroller. I just want to say thank you very much for another three years, hopefully. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Move forward. Moving on. Update, cable contracts. Mr. Maher. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I know you have a full agenda. I appreciate an opportunity to come in and brief you on the current status of cable negotiations. As I outlined in the memorandum, which I think was in your packet, although the various licenses don't, in fact, expire until July, for instance, the first one of 2016, that's Comcast, RCN, in September of that year and the following year, March of Verizon, the process actually begins now under federal law. I'm here just to review that briefly with you. The Cable Advisory Committee sole reason for existence is to advise you as licensing authority. We look to the direction of the town manager as well, as presumably the head of the negotiating team. But we're here to serve the Board of Selectment. Members of the Board of the Commission Committee are myself, Joseph Wies, Dr. Michael Quinn, and David Good, your Director of Technology. There is a vacancy. I will announce with your permission tonight at town, meaning that there is a vacancy and solicit indications of interest from other individuals. Perhaps we can do the usual process, put it on the website, the Reservations Command, go to the manager. I mean, come to the manager, go to Selectment, go to the manager, manager, do a vetting process, perhaps come to you with a recommendation. The process is very simple. The negotiation actually begins when the town puts together a projected license or a wish list to each of the respective license holders. They respond with a projected license, negotiations ensue. Prior to that time, we have an ascertainment period, and we're actually suggesting to you that we get with that ascertainment period, begin, we're suggesting it begins actually next month. The process is, and your committee is very pleased to take a lead on that, if you like. We interview all the stakeholders, ACMI, various department heads in town, Council on Aging, elderly folks. We probably will put together a survey that we can get out to town meeting members as well as the general public. That generally takes about a six-month period. Once that is finalized, we will then come to you with those results, suggest to you a list of both percentage revenue to presumably go to ACMI and some capital expenditures to benefit the town, which has been the case in the past. I will, in subsequent memoranda, give you a review of each of the highlights of the respective licenses. And we'll keep you up to date. And again, we're here to serve the licensing authority, and we look forward to doing that. Thank you, Mr. Maher. Any comments? Mr. Greeley. Can I say first how wonderful it is, Mr. Maher, to have you back in front of us? Well, as I was telling you in the inner sanctum before, my life is desolation now with at least Monday nights. And is there any selection that you miss more than any others, Mr. Greeley? No, not really. Let me repeat the question. You may not have understood. I mean, Monday nights, I sit at the can't, wouldn't just stare out the window and toward the town hall. Mr. Moderator, I ask that we ask Mr. Maher and his committee to complete filling that committee and to lead us through the ascertainment process. And report back to us after the six months unless you need us before then. Second. That sounds great. Now, should we leave the appointment process up to the Selections Office? Would that be appropriate? The appointment is the Board of Selections, but I'm sure with everything you look, you look to the town manager for a recommendation. We'll aid Mr. Shapdalane in vetting any candidates. Excellent. Thank you, Mr. Maher. I know that we have many residents here to... We want to vote the motion. Oh, we have to vote. Sorry. We had a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? As I was saying, I know there are many residents here to talk about Wright Street tonight. I would like to ask if you wouldn't mind if we take number 12 on the agenda, which is the vote to endorse the resolution for town meeting electronic voting out of order in case this meeting runs late, and we have to potentially discuss that tonight at town meeting. So move, recommend favorable action. Second. Any discussion? Well, I think that the electronic voting has been going well, and I think that we should keep using it. And so I think we should so advise town meeting that that's what we think we should do. I agree completely. You know. Okay. So we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Now, back to number four, request to repair private way Wright Street. I think we'll begin by having the board. Any discussion from the board? We will ask the residents to speak. Ms. Carol. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate it. And I appreciate everything that's been put forward to the to the board on this matter as the resident of a private way that's gone through some similar machinations before. I recognize that these types of projects can be contentious within the neighborhood. I was contacted by some residents of the neighborhood and I did meet with them as well as the representative for the butters to the project. And I would like, if it's appropriate, Mr. Chair, I'd like to put forward a motion which does appear on the desk and was run by town council. And then I'll explain it if it receives a second. Move that the board of selectmen do hereby grant partial approval of the 2014 private way repair petition received from the butters of the private way known as Right Street between Summer Street and Huntington Road, set approval to extend from Summer Street to the property boundary between the lots known as 23 Right Street and 27 Right Street. This approval is conditioned upon two-thirds of the abutting property owners to such a revised scope of the betterment, agreeing to such partial approval pursuant to Title III, Article III, Section IV of the town bylaws, authorization of expenditures from the private way account shall not exceed $20,000. The resultant cost shall be apportioned, collected on a per-property basis in accordance with Article III repairs to private ways of the bylaws of the town of Arlington and Chapter 80 of the General Laws, the Betterment Act. Do we have a second? Second, sir. Okay. If I might explain. Yes, please. So I was contacted by residents. I went down and I think that, you know, our private way bylaw, the repair bylaw, is put there for really one or two reasons. Firstly, it provides a financing mechanism for residents of private ways who may not otherwise be able to incur the costs that can be substantial to, you know, pave and redo a private way. And so it does provide a provision for paying over time. The town actually floats the money out of the private way account, which is what we're being asked to, one of the things that we're being asked to authorize tonight. The other thing that it enables is it does provide a mechanism such that when a project is put forward, it is possible to forward the project, even if there is some opposition within, along the abutting, amongst the abutters, around that project so that nothing, things are not stopped completely in their tracks. This project is a little bit different and I'd like to refer my colleagues to the map that's included in the packets. If you look at the map and you also compare it with the list of abutters who are petitioning for the improvements, you'll find that there are actually, in this case, there are two abutters who did not agree to the improvements. And as it happens, the two abutters who did not agree to extreme end of the project limits as outlined on this map. They show up on the map as 27 and 34, Wright Street. We think that 34 is actually in error as the abutters list represents this as 36, Wright Street, which did not agree to the work. As is proposed by the petitioners, the work would extend past the two properties where the owners do oppose the work being done and the associated assessments. It would also proceed further across the intersection with Huntington Road to the corner of the wetlands there by the Reedsbrook, as you know. A number of people in the area have expressed concern around the wetlands issues and the potential for a cut through traffic issue when people are waiting at the lights to go down to Park Ave extension. But more importantly, I think we have a unique situation here where we have two abutters at the end of the road who are opposing it and would not necessarily be standing in the way of the majority of the project being completed. As I see it, we have a very tricky balancing act to pursue here, and I see that we have potentially four goals that we want to try to, to my mind, we would want to try to see. Firstly, we would want to see all or most of the residents petitioning for the betterment to be able to take advantage of that. Secondly, I think that if it was at all possible we would like to avoid forcing an assessment upon residents who are in opposition if possible. Thirdly, I think that there is a goal to try to balance the wetlands area. That is within the 100 foot buffer area, and that's not strictly within this board's purview, but I think it's important information to have at our hands. And fourthly, I think that there has been a concern raised about if the cut through, if the surface area is made too convenient, it may well create a cut through over to Summer Street and beyond. The last issue that is not necessarily an explicit goal but I think would be a desired outcome of any decision would be that any apportioned assessments be the same or less than what is in the proposal that's before us right now. I've been communicating with Mr. Di Martino who has been representing residents to the board on this. You'll see that he has procured the quotes for the work to be done, and under the proposal before you I'm suggesting that we approve expenditures from the private way fund to extend from Summer Street to the property line between 23 and 27. Mr. Di Martino has provided a revised quote which does appear on our desks from Rick Cooper Asphalt Paving which comes in at $20,000 as opposed to the 27.5 that we have in our packets. If we were to follow the motion that's before us that I've put forward, I think it works out to knocking out those two-end homes, it works out to an assessment of $18.18 per person which is about $300 less per person on the assessment. There's one issue though, and I think it's important to raise this right here. There is one home that appears as $28 on the map which does desire paving in front of their property and they would not get through this board's action they would not be able to get the full benefit of that, the town financing for that portion. They would have to, I think, pursue an agreement with their neighbors beyond the town's action to be able to either get that paving or to be made whole in some other way. So this is what I'm proposing. I think it strikes a reasonable balance between a number of competing interests in the neighborhood, but I'd like to hear what the residents have to say as well. Mr. Dunn. My first question is on the amount, $20,000. So I know we've got a quote here for $20,000, but I always worry about putting into hard number. How confident are we in $20,000? It's all based on the quote. Then I guess I respectfully request that we change the $20,000, something like $30,000, and let the bid process take care of it and not try to cap it so tight to what the bid is. I mean, yeah, you understand my argument? I do understand. And I have no problem with that. I think just we should clarify for the, Mr. Chair, if it's okay. You can respond. I think it's important to clarify to residents, we're not saying that the job cost $30,000, we're saying we're authorizing an expenditure out of the private way account up to $30,000. I think that we, yes, and I really do think we should do that. But I think we might want to ask counsel. So before the, what's before the board right now is emotion. And to some degree, the number can remain ambiguous in the emotion itself. But when the formal betterment order is adopted, there has to be an estimate that cannot be changed. In other words, it cannot exceed that amount. And it also impacts the third that has to be put forth before the remaining amount can basically become right for assessment later. So there does have to be at some point before at least the order is finalized and signed by the select man a set number. So the contractor has to, I guess, understand that as well. It's not really an estimate in the traditional sense of the word. It's binding to some degree on the town and the residents in terms of what the expectation is about. Should we be putting that level of specificity in this vote? I think that if you don't put it in this vote, you're going to have to put it in very, very soon thereafter. So in theory, you could exclude it from this vote because Mr. Currow is proposing to change the scope of what the petition has asked for. It has to go back and then be approved by two thirds of the folks who are actually now affected by this revised proposal under our bylaws so that if you look at the map, whereas previously it would have included properties 34 and 27, now it will require a two thirds agreement to Mr. Currow's revision of the properties minus those two. So you're reading, you're reading of the bylaw, that's interesting, so you're reading of the bylaw then is that we actually, if we change the scope, we have to go back and talk to everybody? You don't have to go back and talk to everybody. What I'm saying is that as the petition has been drawn up to the X, now the select man would say, we'll approve Y. You have to make sure that they still want it. They don't, there's not another hearing. They just have to say that we, the two thirds of these folks agree to this because otherwise we could dramatically change the proposal and they'd still be sort of stuck saying. Okay. All right. I'm uncomfortable, shall not exceed 20,000. So we can see where we're going. My other comment is I, my current preference, having walked around the neighborhood and checked things out is that I talked to some people, is that I would rather say the border rather than between 23 and 27. I would rather say the border between 20 and 34. That's my current preference, but I'm very interested in hearing what the residents say, but I want to put that out on the table to perhaps see what feedback we get from people who come to the microphone. And the reason I say 20 and 34 is I understand that that does impact 20. I mean, there's a, I have, you know, there is not a compromise here. I see that makes everybody happy. And the question is, is who's unhappy? And in this case, I'm picking the, and I don't see a way to make both number 28 and number 27 happy. So my preference I think is to, given what I see the road, you know, looking at the road and what I know I would want and the express desires. So, but I look forward to hearing more input before I really choose what I'm going to vote. Great. Mr. Grayley. So that's similar to what I was going to ask. Why we don't say on the right to end at 23 to 27 and on the left to end between 28 and 34. I know it's a diagonal line, but it still includes the property 28. But am I right that we do have the two-thirds vote of everybody without 27 and 34? Yes. That's what we require to have this done. So I want to hear from the neighbors, of course. Yeah. That's fine. Okay. So I thought, well, Mr. Travelling, you know, I think we'll open up to the neighbors now. If I think it would be best, I think, you know, we're going to have quite a few people to speak. So perhaps if we could just start at the beginning and form a line behind the microphone, and then as people sit down and more room opens up, we can just kind of funnel in back through the, through everyone who would like to speak. Yes, please. Good evening. I'm 28, right street. You know, actually the concentration of the holes actually are between my property, and I guess it's 27. So we, we are the yes and the no. Yep. It's my understanding, though, that 27 is the only no. I believe 36 was actually a no show. There are reasons for it. 34. I believe the address is 36. Yeah, I think this is messed up. 36. I'm not really correct. I have some ideas about why that's a no show, but I'd rather not say that on a public forum. I can tell you later. But I would be confident if I was allowed to do something at least in front of my own property, that I would have 36 as permission. And I would have no problem asking George if that would, 27, if that would be okay to do something in front of my property, property only. I just want to outline a few things that I experience as the concentration is in front of my house. It's not really a cosmetic issue for me at this point. There have actually been winters where the holes have been bad enough that the plows would lift at Huntington, drive to Berkeley, and then put the plow back down to shovel. And so I'm the only house in the middle. I don't sit on top of Huntington like 36 does, nor the neighbor to my right sits on Berkeley. So they have other exits off of the street. Whereas when that happens with the snow and the lack of shoveling, I walk out and I have to decide, do I shovel to Huntington to get out? Or do I shovel to Berkeley to get out? I think that's unique to me only. And that's not an easy task. That's the biggest issue for me. And as a taxpayer, I cannot be, I should not be denied services because of the holes. So I think it's a hazardous thing at this point. It's just not a cosmetic thing. The idea of the road as is no longer works. I have a few times with my husband, we've spent money out of our own pocket to have truckloads of gravel and dirt delivered. It costs between $500 and $600 to have a truckload of gravel. That's just a habit brought and dumped onto the street. My husband and I, again, with the shovels, like Paul Bunyan have to get out there day and night and get that into the holes. And that just barely makes the holes that are in the concentration of my street. Those holes, by the way, like I said, are shared between me and 27, but I've been the one to try to tackle those holes. So obviously you can understand that the cost of now having a pay is like a sale, a coal sale compared to truckloads of dirt, which when the plow does come and does put it down, it digs that right back up and that's gone instantly that winter within a couple of plows. So the best economic thing is to have a pay. I think for me, those are the most important points I can express. I'm sure there are other people who want to say something, but I just wanted to express that as the person who is most vulnerable by the holes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next. Hello. My name is Michelle Jarosier, a precinct 19 town meeting member, as well as an associate member of the Conservation Commission. So I'm going to make a few remarks with each of those hats on, starting first with the town meeting member role. I got involved due to the varying opinions about the approving this particular project by some of the neighbors. And I really appreciate first one to say the attempt by the board to come up with a compromise solution. It is certainly not a straightforward issue, but I'm really in support of Mr. Kuros' substitute motion as a good compromise of the issues at hand. Because the town bylaw specifically talks about your role in approving in whole or in part, I think the concentration of the homes that don't approve the project at the... alternate solution. The issues with some of the non-abutter neighbors that were brought to my attention had to do a lot with the traffic, as Mr. Kuros has mentioned, but also about the speed of the traffic, partly in relation to the entrance to McLennan Park. As you may know, there is a distinct entrance to the park there. And because of the nature of the neighborhood being a quiet sort of off the beaten path type of neighborhood, citizens walk in the roadway with their strollers, with their dogs, with young children on tricycles. And so there is, I think, a pace of activity there that does require a little bit of attention with your decision. I was appreciative of also some alternate solutions being put forward for traffic calming, such as speed bumps or raised areas of the roadway, things of that nature which you can evaluate. I don't know which ones of those may be even possible or legal, but I just urge you to think about some of those mitigations if possible in the final project that's approved. With my Conservation Commission hat on, I just want to also point out that there are some permitting issues that would need to be coming before the Conservation Commission on two points. First, the proximity to the wetland. And secondly, the elevation of the scope of the work in relation to the floodplain. So those are the two areas that in my conversation with the Conservation Commission administrator this morning, she has conveyed to the representative for the neighbors in support of the project. What I don't know offhand is if the different lines that you're considering completely remove it from the jurisdiction of the concom, certainly because it would move it away from the wetlands, that would be a superior outcome from a wetlands resource perspective. And those are my main points. Thank you very much for delivering so carefully. Thank you, Michelle. Next. I live on Nine Wright Street. I've been there for over 20 years. I used to be quite fond of the dirt road. I'm not anymore. It's a mess. It has deteriorated over the years. The potholes are enormous. I walk a large dog at night and during the daytime. I walk through mud, slush, snow, water. It's icy all winter or slushy because the salt doesn't work on a dirt road. The plows pick up the dirt and dump it often near the conservation land. So we have a problem of dirt moving back and forth. I am tired of shoveling dirt all winter. I think it's really important that as a neighborhood we have thought about paving for a long time and we have the votes now to say yes. So I'm very much in support of moving ahead. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. My name is George Tafankian, number 27, the culprit. We all have reasons to buy our houses and one of the reasons was for me to buy a house in a peaceful, quiet place. And that was right street. And that was 24 years ago. So I'm one of the all-timers in there. I bought that because I didn't want any traffic. I didn't want any cars or any noise in there. And my house is in the corner. It specifically is vulnerable for both sides and vehicles coming right now, cutting through from one side even though it's all potholes, messy and everything else. They still drive coming to the corner and then taking off on Hunterton Road. I don't like that. I'm not for paving the road. I don't want to be against my neighbors. However, I have no reason. I don't even have a driveway. My land, Mr. Kura has seen that. It extends, it's about six feet high. I don't even use right street. It's all stone and everything else. I use all my entrances and everything. It's on Hunterton Road. That may sound kind of selfish. But listen, we were not blind when we bought the properties. I knew where I was buying my property. Everybody else knew where they were buying it. So why would I pay or go through the traffic and the noise of this paving where the only winner, I think financially speaking, is a developer. He wants to build those houses. And I don't blame him to build them up, maximize his profit, sell them out, and he's gone. We're stuck with everything else. Higher assessment, higher taxes, higher traffic, and the cost. So it would have been a little bit different if he had come and said, okay neighborhood, I don't know what he's done to everybody else. Listen, I'm going to buy those lands in here. I'm going to put up three houses. And in order for me to sell them for the highest price, I need to pave it, and I need your permission. So can we do something about that rather than just playing with their emotions? Of course they're sick and tired of their shoveling and everything else. But they knew that when they bought them, when they bought the houses. And I knew that when I bought the house, that everything was on hunting tour. So I am against it for that reason. And safety, we have a couple of neighbors in there. They have kids. They have new kids. I don't know how they are agreeing, but it's their decision. But my thing is that, you know, the kids are not going to be able to play around in there. That's a big thing. I don't know if they bought it for that reason. About the pothole being big enough and everything. The cars being ruined, their suspensions, this and that. Drive slowly in there. You just get out of there and get on the main road and drive. So I'm against it. Specifically, I'm very much against it. And I hope that the board understands that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hi, I'm Jennifer Norris. I'm at 14 Wright Street and we've lived in that house for seven years. We have a nine year old, 16 month old. So we're definitely among the folks that have enjoyed the quiet of the road and have concerns about people using Wright Street from Huntington as a cut through. I'm a Boston driver. I know you always go through where you can get through quickly and don't have to have the patience of the lights. And it's a concern that we had as we were deliberating whether we wanted to vote yes, which we ultimately did on the paving project. You know, like everybody who has spoken of shoveling and the potholes, the road is in terrible condition and from a driving point of view. That's very unpleasant from walking around in front of your house. It's very nice because there's very little traffic. As we deliberated, we talked about two different solutions that for us would make us more comfortable voting yes. One of them was the idea of not paving all the way through Huntington, but we were aware that particularly one neighbor who spoke earlier, I really felt strongly that she needed the services and the paving of the road that it was in a condition that wouldn't work for her. And so I'm interested in Mr. Dunn's proposal that would allow her at least to have some paving. The other solution that we discussed and I talked briefly with the town engineer about was the idea of putting in speed bumps. We were advised that the plowers do not like to have speed bumps that they eventually get destroyed from the paving and that it creates kind of a dangerous situation for their equipment. So we've explored the option of having temporary seasonal speed bumps that we can put in during the months that are not plowed. And the neighbors have agreed that we would purchase such a device to go across the road to help mitigate the speed. And with that agreement, we felt comfortable voting yes. So I guess you could say we're kind of middle of the road on the proposals, both literally and figuratively, and I just wanted to contribute those thoughts. Thank you. Mr. Dunn. I'm ready to formalize what I said before as an amendment to Joe. I think Joe's got the great, I completely appreciate the spirit of it, but I want to make, I would change 23 and 27 to pave it up to 28 and 34 and I want to change the number 20,000 to 30,000 and offer that as an amendment to Joe's motion. Second. I'll second that for discussion. Okay. Mr. Greerly. Yeah. I'm wondering whether the resident of 34 or 36, whatever the correct number is here and whether he or she would choose to speak on this. Okay. Because I favor the paving of this road, but I oppose the amendment and my apologies. I want you to imagine that it was numbers 19 and 18. I know it isn't. I'm just giving a hypothetical here. If we make this now change to the bylaw, which is if two thirds of the residents want it, it's done. Now we're saying, oh, except for these two spaces and the one resident who spoke just said, I don't really deal with it because I'm on Huntington Road in terms of the entrances into his property and stuff. All of the two thirds of the neighbors want this. Imagine if it was 19 and 18, would we say, okay, let's pave it up to 19 and 18 and then we'll stop and then let's start repaving it again from 23 and 1. So I understand these two are at the end and they have their right to their opinions and stuff, but the gentleman who just spoke at 27 didn't convince me that it isn't a selfish decision on his part. I understand about the neighbor's concern about cars rushing through there. I live in Mystic Street. I know about speeding cars going by and stuff, but I'd rather that than the potholes. I mean, I don't want them speeding either. I understand that. But I'm worried about we set this precedent and now another private road comes in and says, hey, wait a minute. You made an exception for two houses before. Why can't we made an exception for me? I'm against it. The bylaw risk, if two thirds of the neighbors want it, we vote it. That's my opinion. Mr. Chair. Mr. Carroll. Thank you, Mr. Greerly. I appreciate that. I think I would not have brought this forward actually if the bylaw didn't specifically say the board may after careful consideration elect to do the entire portion, which was petition for or a lesser portion. I understand. And that's why. And I understand. And I think that the reasons behind the bylaw and the two thirds do make sense for precisely the hypothetical example that you put forward when somebody's in the middle, I think I said that at the outset, if somebody's in the middle of a road, they could potentially block the entire project for everyone. I also, I think it's important that we make clear here that no matter what we vote tonight, if we vote Mr. Dunn's amendment to my motion, if we vote my motion, if we vote to support the original petition, we're actually not voting on whether or not the work can be done. We're voting on what scope of work we're willing to fund out of the private way repair account. So if it was just that margin, for example, let's take another hypothetical, if my motion were to work to prevail, there is still a margin there for that half of the frontage, which could theoretically be handled outside of the town's private way account. And that's what I'm proposing. Are you aware of another private way where we've done this, excluded homes from the private way? You would know that far better than I. I honestly don't. I don't think anybody here remembers such a thing. Okay. I mean, I understand we can. I'm just, Mr. Dunn. I guess, Mr. Greenland, my concern is that if we do the original motion, we look at neither 34 nor 27 has expressed that they want this to happen. And they, and we have the opportunity to pave everybody who wants it and not pave in front of those two who don't because of the way the, and so if we go with the original petition where paving a stretch of road, that as far as I can tell, no one actually wants paved. Like, I haven't heard anyone say, I want the corner of Huntington and Wright. I mean, so I know Joe was walking around yesterday. I did a walk up the street last night, you know, it was a beautiful day. There are a few people hanging out. I haven't yet heard, and I didn't hear tonight either, anyone say, I want the intersection of Huntington and Wright paved. And I heard a number of people who said that they don't want that intersection paved because of fear of cut through. And so that's why I, that's why I'm suggesting that the change. I didn't hear that. I heard it from one person who do 27. No, no, I didn't hear wrong. But I don't think we either of us heard anyone who say, I want that corner to be paved. Does anybody out there want it paved all the way to Huntington? I will shut. Oh, wait, wait, wait. There we go. We still want, we have more discussion coming from there. Okay. I'm just saying I didn't hear. I think that's very healthy. Yeah, let's do it. My name is Mimi Lawson. I live at 73 Huntington Road. I am on the corner across from George. And we really have gone through this. I've been in the house 45 years. We've been through this process four times. Now, all of a sudden I see repair of Huntington Road. This all came about because new houses went up on the street and they decided the road should be paved. I am not involved. I don't, didn't get any letters, but I am really opposed to any paving. And has anyone ever thought of really grading the road? There are a lot of ruts. Grade the road. It would be a lot simpler, less costly. And that's something that no one has ever brought up. It can't be done that way. Sorry. Why is that? If work is done, it needs to be paved. I mean, unless the private residents want to just do something without our help. Right, Adam, can you explain that? We have taken care of potholes in front of our garage and, I mean, in front of our driveway many times without asking the town for any help. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Mike DiMattino and I'm the big bad builder. So this, this all happened. The neighborhood got together and we all kind of joined forces. I did not shove this down anybody's throat by any means of George. This all happened because they've been trying to do this for 10 years. We've, we've, we had a neighborhood meeting. We all sat there. They signed petition right off the bat. Within 10 minutes, everybody wanted this. I'm the one that's, that's occurring the cost, a lot of them. They're surveying the engineering. Any manhole raising, I propose that I would take care of it just to help this through and help these neighbors. They've been trying to do this for 10 years. And I feel like I'm being put on a spot like I'm the one that's driving this. I'm really not. You know, now I'm part of this neighborhood and they're just trying to get this done. And we have an engineering, hopefully Mike will speak today. He's been up there. This, this road is a mess. It really is. And it needs to be addressed. Any questions? Right. If I may, Mr. Justin. Well, Mike, could you come back? Miss Greeley has. No, no, no. I just wanted, we all agree the road needs to be done. It's not, it's what we're doing. So please just speak to the 3427 end issue if you would. Yes, please. Hi. So I'm Natalie Zanni. I'm a lifelong resident of Arlington and I've lived on Wright Street for 10 years. I'm number 23. So I'm in the dividing line, I guess. I just wanted to reiterate that we just, what Mike just said, we met as a neighborhood and we have been working on this often on for 10 years to have this happen. It just so happens that Mike has purchased property in the neighborhood. It was a catalyst to once again have this discussion. But it's certainly nothing that anybody has been forced to do. We had a meeting at my own house where I had the petition and we offered people time to think about it if they wanted to. And before I knew it, the petition was back in my hands fully signed. So that tells me that we have alignment within the neighborhood for the most part. Understanding my neighbor, Mr. Toofcandy and his wife are not supportive. Number 34 or 36 has not participated. We have neighborhood events. They do not participate. We would love them to, but they don't. So we don't know what their stake is in this situation or what their thoughts are. I think it needs to be done. It's time. Change happens. I moved into my house and I made changes. Things happen. Even though you buy a property in a certain way, things do evolve over time and need to be repaired. And we're at that point with the road. Does anyone have any other kind of new comments? I think we were getting a pretty good scope of, you know, a lot of the issues. But if anyone has anything new to add to the conversation, we would love to hear that. If you have to come to the microphone. I just want to, can you check? We can't do that in an open meeting. Unfortunately, anything we consider has to be a part of the public record. I'll say this much, which is kind of what I said before. In terms of 36 Wright Street, I believe if it were not a case of cost, they would probably be quite indifferent, unlike George is a clear and fervent. No. They keep a low profile in terms of, I think, showing out and interacting with us as neighbors, because there was actually a violation into my home. So that's why probably they would not be sitting next to here. However, like I said, I do, you know, I have interacted with them since and confronted, et cetera, et cetera. I do feel comfortable enough to approach them and say, would I be able to do something in front of my home with your permission? I'm quite confident that they would have no problem with that. In terms of it going to Huntington, because it would cost them, I'm sure they, you know, would rather not have to pay anything. Would they have a problem if, you know, it was free? I think so. Any questions from the board? A quick question recognizing that the chair has to get down to town meeting. Yes. Perhaps a yes or no. On the issue of seasonal road bumps, that is not something we allow. On the question of seasonal road bumps, from my knowledge from sitting here, is that something we allow or is that something we don't? I know it's a practice we've not allowed in the past. I'm unclear, and I know town council, I would have to discuss whether or not we could allow it on a private way or have any ability to prohibit it on a private way. Mike, do you know? Good afternoon. Mike Rodamarker, Public Works. I know of one of the locations, private way, that the folks put out a speed bump in the summer and then pull it back in the winter. Thank you. So we have any other discussion from the board? Any more from the audience? So I think we'll begin by taking a vote on Mr. Dunn's motion. Which everyone knows, it will go up to $30,000 in the amendment and it will be between 28 and straight across to 27. Is that correct, Mr. Dunn? Yes. No. Yes. I thought it was diagonal. I don't believe that it's practical, is my concern. If it was, I would do it. I just don't see it. So we have that vote now. All those in favor, please say aye. Opposed? No. 4-1 vote on the amendment. Yeah, after this vote I'm going to. I abstain. So 3-1 with Kevin abstaining. Marie. Thank you. So I just need some communication before this vote. We have to vote the main motion. Yes. No. I understand. Mr. Dunn, so I don't think it's a good precedent to set, but I do want to get it paved. Can I vote no against him, but will it still get paved? Well, it probably will. Okay. Okay. Okay. So now we have a vote on the main motion. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. 4-1. And I think it was an excellent idea and a good compromise. I just don't like setting this up. I do appreciate all the work that was done. I think that we came out to a pretty good decision there for everyone involved. Okay. Yes. So now it would be helpful if everyone had them now, but we did approve paving and it will go from the end of lot 28 straight across halfway through partially through 27. To Summer Street. Yes. Is that clear? Okay. Thank you. So as I understand town council, though, because we as a board just modified the petition that you originally put forward, you're going to have to redo the petition and get two thirds of the people on that segment, which I think you could probably do right now. But, yeah. Sorry. It has to be inviting. Sign it. And just turn it back into the Selectman's office. Yeah. That would be great. And at this point, I believe a few of us will have to go down the town meeting. I do. And Mr. Agrioli does as well as Adam. And Mr. Curell is going to take over. I think I can just sit here. I think. Yeah. I don't see an issue with that. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Next item on the agenda is the introduction. The introduction of the newly appointed disability commission member, Burton D. Push. All right, Chief, please come forward. I'm sorry. Did I pronounce your name correctly? Actually, it's Push as an open door. Push. So it's very easy to do. So I'm glad to hear. Thank you for voting me in. I don't know what I'm supposed to do. Just give us a few words about yourself, why you're interested in this position. I have a doctorate in rehabilitation. And I've been working as a disability rights advocate for decades now. And I really like Arlington. I really, this is one of my favorite places to be. And we all have work to do no matter where we live and where we exist. And hopefully the skill sets and experience that I have and bring to the table will hopefully help the commission move forward and do things for, in my opinion, future generations. I'm not, I don't necessarily think about what I need, but what do the future generations? Because we're moving into more and more of an inclusive environment in all cities everywhere. Excellent. Well, I'll say that your resume was certainly very impressive. And we really appreciate you devoting the time and talent to the commission. It does a lot of important work in town. Thanks. Good to be here. Yeah. I really, I've listened, disability issues are not something that's part of my expertise. And so I listened a lot to what the committee on disabilities has to say. And I would really welcome regular, I think with some committees come forward and they come to the Board of Selectment and they say, you know, this is the bike committee, for instance, is really good at about showing up and saying, these are the things we worked on. These are the things we made progress on. These are the things that we're planning on. And it helps me a lot in terms of what I think we should be doing next so that I can help them. And I think it would be great if we saw more from the, you know, like feedback about what, what the important things are. Well, I think we're on the same page in that. And I'd like to see more of a visible presence. Excellent. To be honest with you. Cool. All right. Ms. Mahan, did you have? Yeah. If it hasn't been, move approval. Good idea. It was approved last. Oh, that's right. Yeah. Yeah. Mr. Push was not available. Dr. Push was unavailable in the last, last meeting. I should remember that. Yeah. And just to sort of echo the comments that were just made. I know that this board is taking an extra concerted effort to utilize the disability commission. We did it with the electronic voting. And the committee said there were some, the electronic voting committee said there were things they hadn't really thought of. I just want to bring to your attention because it happened recently within the past four to six weeks in the commission through the town manager could stay on top of this. We had the study group for the Route 128 study. I'm calling it where they were talking about putting out a survey. And it was focused a lot around bicycle and some motor vehicle. And I had raised Zipcar. But the other issue I had raised since we're getting a sense of how people transport. I had asked that there'd be three or four questions included regarding children or adult with disabilities, how they get transported, whether they do it on their own, whether it's dial ride or private contract through the state, et cetera. But I'm also cognizant of the fact that those questions need to under HIPAA and some other laws be asked a certain way. So I did ask that group and I can see the woman sitting here. I think her name is Rebecca. But just since you're going to be on the disability commission, I would anticipate that you all see that. And if not. I have seen that. Okay. So if you can just make sure that that contact is there because I think I had four directed questions, but I'm not the expert to say how they should be asked. Okay. Super. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And next on the agenda, we have the appointment to the Conservation Commission of Susan D. Chapnick. Is Mrs. Chapnick here? Hello. If you could say a few words about yourself. Sure. My name is Susan Chapnick. I've been a resident of Arlington for almost 30 years. My children have gone to school here. I have a small women-owned business with an office in Arlington. I'm an environmental consultant. I got involved in assisting the Arlington Conservation Commission last year when we had the unfortunate oil spill into the Mystic River at the Rotary. And I volunteered my services in reviewing documents and things under the Massachusetts contingency program, which I'm very familiar with. So as I got to work with the commission a little and the Mystic River Watershed Association, then I saw that there was a position open and I thought I would step up my involvement with the town. Thank you. Do any of my colleagues have any questions, Mrs. Chapnick? Thank you very much. Volunteers like you make the town work, and we really appreciate it. I move approval. Second. And just where we have the opportunity that we have you here. Thank you so much with your varied background coming to this committee. Since I do have your audience, I would just like to something that you're very familiar with from your resume or curriculum vitae. One of the things that the board has really watched, especially along the Owl Wife, are the CSO discharges. Yes. The NPDES permit process when that opens up, as well as the variance that sometimes gets issued. Originally when the city of Cambridge and the MWRA and the city of Summel, the board has always in the past asked for not now, but perhaps within the next 20, 25 years that all the discharges be closed. That'd be great. And when myself and Mrs. Dias, who was on the board at the time, and then Ms. Rowe and other board members, we've attended meetings, what we've heard from MWRA and the city of Cambridge, Owl and O'Reiden, and the city of Summel, and Mayor Curtitone, that that's something everybody would like to do someday. So I'm trying to hold everybody's feet to the fire to say, even if someday is 25 years out. So just in your role in this committee commission, if you all think it's appropriate, because I think it's every 15 years that the NPDES permit process comes up. And I'm pretty sure that's coming up within the next two to three years. Just in your area of expertise, you may see it coming up faster than I do as an individual. And if you think it's appropriate, whether representing the commission or yourself, any expertise you could lend to that would be appreciated. Absolutely. And I'll bring that back to the administrator as well to Corey, because I'm not familiar with when it's coming up. I'm sure she knows. And definitely lend my expertise to that. I'm in full support. In fact, it's unfortunate that the spill on the river, it was cleaned up pretty well. But if you look at the impact even upstream of that, the river is impacted. And it's impacted from what's coming off the roadways through the CSOs. So that's unfortunate. And we've always maintained, since it is recognized, as a Class B waterway. There are legal steps the town of Ellington could take, but that's really kind of going out, reaching and beyond. But that's the goal, eventually, is to come in line with that federal and state standard of a Class B waterway. Thank you. Well, thank you very much. Is there anything else? We appreciate your volunteerism. And I think if you've been here three decades, you know how involved the community is in these issues. And you just got to hear it on one of our public hearings this evening. There are a lot of concerns for them. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Oh, can we have a vote? All those in favor? Yes. Yes. All opposed? Can I ask a housekeeping matter? You might have said this at the beginning. Attorney Jaime, are you recording the votes? I'm recording the notes. So I won't do it. OK. Next up, we have appointment to the Ellington Cultural Council, Jeffrey K. Boudreau. Is Mr. Boudreau here? I saw him here earlier, but I saw him duck out. I think he's also in town meeting. How would my colleagues like to handle this? This was a recommendation directly from the council. Did we want to? Do we want to vote it and then invite him back, as we did with Mr. Push? I would be. So I didn't attend a motion approving the appointment? Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. And just leave it to you, Mr. Carroll, to work with the chairman to get a similar circumstance. Exactly. And if you could, Mr. Heim, if you could make a note in the minutes as well that we'd like to invite Mr. Boudreau back at our next meeting to introduce himself. Thank you. Next up, we move on to licenses and permits. We have, first we have a request for a common vitriol license for Alejandro Barrientos, Coenca Incorporated, DBA La Victoria, Taqueria, 12 Medford Street. Mr. Barrientos here. Please come to the microphone. Hi. How are you? My name is Alejandro Barrientos and I'm an Arlington resident and my kids also go to school here. We are planning on opening the Taqueria on 12 Medford Street. We submit all the applications and I'm here to answer your questions. Do you have any? Certainly. Thank you. Do my colleagues have any questions or comments? I actually don't have a question. I'm really excited that you're here. I'm really excited for the food. I read your application. I read all your reviews on your other locations and location and I can't wait to taste it. So I move approval subject to all conditions. Do I have a second? Second. Do you have any questions or comments on it? I'd just like to thank you also. We did have your review of your other restaurants. They were excellent. I did note that the planning department when looking at your proposal was so enthusiastic about it that they wish that you could stay open even later. So I hope that you do enjoy sufficient success that you'll be able to consider that. We always like to go settle down first and then you decide like, you know, down the road if it's possible to stay open longer. Absolutely. You know, we are very excited. And I know that Darlington is a very selective town with this type of things. And I think we can deliver. And we are also very excited to be here finally. Fantastic. Thank you very much. Thank you. So now we will move to a vote in favor for Mr. Dunn's motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed. The motion carries unanimously. Congratulations. We'll look forward to seeing the restaurant. Yes. Thank you. Next on the agenda, we have a request for a common victual license also on Medford Street. Or Shun Kit Wong, DBA Lucky Dragon restaurant at 14 Medford Street. Hi, good evening. Good evening. My name is Andrea Cole. I'm the paralegal of the Chinese Quest Commons office. I represent the applicant Ken Nong in doing business as Lucky Dragon restaurant. Our proposed application basically is just for the change of ownership. Okay. The new owner is taking over the existing restaurant. They will keep the same nature, Chinese food, same hour and same seating capacity. The only change will be the DBA name. We will change to Lucky Dragon restaurant. All right. Thank you very much. Do I have a motion? I'm sorry. I keep looking to the right because he's next to me. I move approval subject notifications. Second question. If I could just ask through the chair, town council, I know Monday through Saturday we have two or three restaurants that are open until 1 a.m. But this says also on Sunday. Is that allowed under our laws? For some reason I had 10 p.m. in my, I recognize that there are no objections, but there are comments and conditions from four other departments, perhaps that's something you could look into. I don't know off the top of my head. I'll have to look into it. But I think that Mr. Dunn subject, subject language will be sufficient for us to make sure that it's. You can work with attorney. I forgot your last name. Yeah, we call tomorrow to find out. Yeah, I just, if we, if it's allowed under the law, then that's fine. I just want to make sure. Yeah. I can't recall it. Are these the current hours that the restaurant holds? Actually, as I know on my new, they close at 12 on Sunday. So if not 1 a.m. 12 should be fine for them. Okay. I love the two councils. Sure. Talk on that. Thank you. Good. Good. Okay. All those in favor of the application? Aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I, I'm sorry. I, I, I'm sorry. I have been living there for 25 years and I only only bring that up because for the most part it's not been an issue at this, at the site, but it was recommended that I come here. Stephen Gilligan recommended I come and discuss this with you. Have you received the photo of the house? Yes. You see this situation. So there's a, that high wall. So there's that high wall, and for many, many years it had been a line on the road, which was sort of the border of the road. And we always take great care to go completely off that line. The line has since been worn away, so it's hard to see the border there. But we always get off the road completely, and it's not been any kind of niche as far as blocking the road. There's three flights of stairs up to where we live, so to put a subterranean garage or cut out there would be, it's pretty cost prohibitive, in fact it's impossible. So the other strange thing there is that for the most part on that road, there's just a few segments of sidewalk on that side. The other side does have a bit more, but not completely all the way up Westminster. There's a segment, as you can see in the photo, that ends right before my road, and then again, but by my house, and then it stops. So again, we just try to get off into that park. So I don't think there's any obstruction. If there were people to walk, they wouldn't be walking there anyway because the sidewalk sort of ends. And when it snows, we do the same. Get off the road completely, and we just shovel out after what we've been plowed in every time. We just shovel it out. So just looking for a possible. We do have, I'd say there's the ability to park more than two cars, but it was recommended that I only request two. I only have two cars in the house at the moment anyway. But we have a choice of three different areas in front of the wall to just take up two of them at the moment. Thank you. Ms. Bond, do you have comments? Just a few comments. First, noting that we have from the Allenton Police Department Officer Roteau indicating that they do not support the request. And I sort of try to equate this with a like scenario in terms of where the parking is now and the possible proposal. I know when we went through the Forest Street Reconstruction, one of the driving points, top three, top four, was that cars were parking quote unquote where the sidewalk was. But it was a similar sidewalk to what we see here in the photo. And that's one of the reasons when the road was being redesigned. And I do know that residents up on Forest Street have the similar thing in terms of the brick wall. And what they've done is installed driveways. Officer Roteau notes that the cost of a project for a private landowner to put into private driveway is not one of the extenuating circumstances that we mitigate. And consider non-deliberations. And then the other point that he makes basically is if we take a public way, we could be setting a precedent that private parties can make improvements part of a public way and then be granted exclusive parking privileges. And basically setting this precedent, we could see this basically all over the town in a similar scenario. So I'd like to hear from my other two colleagues first before I make a motion right now. I'm inclined to support the all into police department's recommendation. Mr. Dunn. So I'm trying to understand you mentioned, but I can quite get it. What brought you here today? So very sporadically throughout the 25 years, I'll get a ticket. Yeah. And when I go to the police department, they say, well, if someone calls on the road for another car, and not saying it's mine, I had to ticket all the cars on the road. So it happened twice this winter. And it was, I think it was actually pretty close proximity to the two tickets. It didn't happen at all the whole rest of the winter. And it actually hadn't happened in a bunch of years. To me, that's an indication that my car is not obstructing the road in any way. But there are times when people park literally on the road and somebody calls, whether it's down the road, calls for it. And if that's the case, he says, we must ticket you. So I went to Mr. Gilligan and he said, I'm going to let the ticket go. Go and apply for this because I think it's valid. I think you should do it. I don't see a problem here. But go through the process to validate it properly. Go through the proper channels. So that's why I'm here. Correct me if I'm wrong. Don't we have a couple parking spaces on Forest Street that are essentially like this? Yes. But what we did was when we used the state funding, they built that temporary spot where the car could pull in and there still is a sidewalk. Not on the uphill side on Forest Street. Like if I'm driving towards Winchester on the right hand side, some of those cars, I think of some of those. And you were on the, I wasn't on the board for that. I'm not, I wanted to be on the board for that part, that particular conversation. So I generally agree with Officer Ratau. I'm a little bit, this one I'm more in favor of simply because they can get all the way off the road. And once you can get off the road, I'm like. My other really strong concern is the precedent. Yeah. This can be replicated hundreds of times throughout the town and certain streets. I think the difference, if I'm recalling correctly, as Mohan knows this better than I, Forest Street did build in some off street parking spots. And permits were allocated to people, but they weren't allocated to a specific spot if I'm not mistaken. I don't think people were told this is your spot, your dedicated spot for a specific resident. And as I understand this request, this is for specific spots in front of your home, off street parking spot. Just in front of my property, which is the wall. So, you know, as there's no demarcation, that's just what we found in the area to put our cars. Right. I was, you know, someone said to me, don't ask for three, two is more reasonable. Is that grass strip actually your property or is that? Is the what? Do you know if that is actually your property in front of the wall or is that the public way? I don't know the answer. I believe so, yeah. I believe. If it was, I wouldn't have to ask our permission. On to your point, Mr. Chairman, what we did was those spots. We told the residents during the day, anybody can park there. Then we asked them to apply it for overnight parking. Right. So they could park there overnight, just to that point. I don't think they had specific spots that were assigned to each individual fire company. No, and they said if for some reason that spot could take and, you know, there were other. But I think that shouldn't be an obstacle because we could construct this in that exact same way. Like, so I think the question of precedent, I think is a very solid one. And, but I think that that particular concern, we can, we can really get, we can solve that one easy. And my only concern is if we say, okay, these two public spots are dedicated to this resident. Right. Yeah. But I don't think we can, I don't think we have to do that. We could simply say, he's, we could grant two overnight permission for two overnights. And that, like, and do it exactly like this. Most. May. It's legal for them to do that because it's during the day and therefore, you know, it's, but at night, he would be the only one with a permit. I guess just from my years of service on this board, this is a really, I think dangerous precedent for setting because we do for one. Yeah. We already did it for Forestry, though, didn't we? Yeah, but no, that was a state repayment and working with the neighbors. This is a resident coming in. So. Can I say something? So what my, my request is not so that I could then park on the street. I would still always get off the street because I think for that, I'm also concerned about, I have two children. We've always been concerned about that road anyway. There's been some speeding. It's a sensitive issue overall. So we also very careful to get off the road. So there is the best way of navigating that road as well. You know, there's been some accidents. So I'm not planning on ever parking on the street, always be the same situation on that dirt park getting completely off. If they ever repayment and they put that line in as they, I'm sure they will, they will always be within the boundaries of that line. You know, the house is 100 years old this year and it was built at a time when this was not even potentially an issue. So it's, it's a hard, it's a hard situation. I know, but I'm respectful of the situation. I guess I would say the topography is not precluded from putting in a driver. It would be costly, but we have told other people in the same circumstances that that's what they have to do. So I think I'm going to, my vote, depending on the motion, whoever wants to make it, I can make a motion, but I think people know which way I'm going. I think if there is no motion, I think it's just in limbo and it's not been granted is my, my impression. I don't, I don't know that we even. I'm just very concerned, but I would like to pass that there's any way we could refer this to the parking subcommittee, which two members of the board, including myself sit on, Officer Roteau, Mr. Gilligan, Mrs. Cropelka, and sometimes Mr. Olsen, but perhaps it might now be Mr. Morse, to see, because I haven't gone by recently and really looked at the area. I look at the surrounding adjacent properties and or if there are any town properties where it's out by Moncoboa, although we had a conversation the other day on a different facet of Moncoboa, because I hate to just say no. I would be willing to, I would be willing to consider that partly because the referral apparently came from a member of that parking subcommittee. And so I wouldn't mind having our board representatives with the other members have the conversation and come back to us with some reasoning about why the precedent should be broken. And along with that, what we've done in the past, just to God bless you, stay with the same. Any matter that's gone before the parking subcommittee, we through the town manager and or through the chair just inform the police department that for the duration of this issue being studied, that tickets won't be issued until we're resolved with this. So are you putting that in the form of a motion? Mm-hmm. Second. Okay. Is there any further discussion on it? May I make sure I understand the motion? The motion is to refer to the parking subcommittee for recommendation of the Board of Selectment. During the parking subcommittees examination of the issue, the police department will be requested not to issue any tickets. In front of what you're at? 91. 91. Okay. Westminster Avenue. And then what we'll do is you can check with the Selectment's office, Mrs. Kruppelka, you can let you know we post the meetings. They're open to the public. You may want to come in and or if it's not a good time, send somebody else in or submit written testimony or anything or an email, whatever works with your schedule. We usually try to meet early in the morning so that people can, we can meet and then and we usually don't have more than one to three agenda items. So it's not that you're sitting around a long time. Is it to my advantage to come? It helps. And if you can, and if it's something that, you know, you need to really get out for work, you can be the first person. I'm glad to come. I think that's fine. Yeah. I think it's a good motion. If nothing else, it helps me give more time because I'm really torn. Yeah. Okay. And then I think on an issue like this, it would benefit everybody if the full board were here and the other two members had to leave. I'm not saying anything. The subcommittee includes the person who referred you and the person who was recommending against as well as two members of the board. So I think it would be great to hash through the issues of, you know, precedence and what makes this different. Yeah, that's a good one. So, okay. All those in favor of Ms. Mahan's motion, please say yes. Yes. Yes. All opposed. It passes. So you have temporarily, temporary relief pending the further decision. Thanks for hearing me. And so I call Marie to get the schedule. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Either works. The next item on the agenda is a request for Punjab late night event. My understanding is that this was withdrawn. Is there somebody here on that? On Punjab? I have from the chairman. Oh, here. He left his agenda. I took his because I couldn't find mine. My understanding is that it's been withdrawn. My understanding is it was withdrawn. I spoke to the board administrator today and she said that it's been withdrawn. So it was dispensed with that. We also did take care of the resolution already on town meeting, electronic voting. Oh, great. And so we move on to correspondence received. Oversee. We have, do I have a second on that? Second. We have under correspondence received, we have a letter from Catherine Harani of 19 Maple Street regarding maintenance of the town gardens. We have a letter from Cheryl Marceau of 10 Cleveland Street regarding heavy trucks on Cleveland Street. And we have a letter from Ken Koeman, the disabled American vets in the State House in Boston regarding the force closure of bar lounge operations of chapter 49. Do we have anyone here who wished to speak briefly to any of those, any of those letters? Please come to the mic. Maple Street and basically right in the backyard here. And I do want to start by saying that the gardens are fantastic this time of year. But I have noticed in the 25, 20 plus years we've been here that they're sort of slowly declining. And, you know, but they especially took a beating this past summer fall when a big function tent was laid out and left in the heat of the summer at the Wintermoor-Robbins ground and really did a lot of damage to the grass. And it's not quite coming back. And of course the library wall dumping ground that has not quite been cleaned up. And then some of the tree trimming kinds of things behind the doll and sculpture and reflecting pool. It just, and the fact that the properties haven't really had a spring cleaning yet. It just really, I just wanted to point out just, there's a lot of little things that, you know, I grumble about daily. But the big picture kinds of things have deteriorated beyond what I think is appropriate for such a special place. Great. Thank you very much. Please come forward. I'm Miriam Levine. I live on Academy Street. My husband John Lane also sent a letter regarding Robbins Park. But I don't, it doesn't seem to be on the agenda. However, we're longtime residents of Arlington. We walk frequently in Robbins Park. We bring people there. And in the last 40-some-on years, the deterioration of the park has occurred. And as Catherine said, there are many, many little things, but it seems to be moving toward a tipping point. I would also say that the park, the buildings are a gem. People come, you know, from other areas to see it, to enjoy it. Watercolor classes come to paint it. And I would just, you know, trust that the select men and Ms. Mahon, all of you, do all you can to bring the park back, can't bring it back to what it was, but to do all you can to improve it and to maintain it. So thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else here to speak on any of these pieces of correspondence? Oh, just briefly, because obviously we have this. I'm David Baldwin. I live on Academy Street also. I've been enjoying the parks for the past 55 years. I think that the parks are also would extend it to the old burying ground as part of the Arlington Civic Block. A couple of weeks ago at the master plan working group meeting, this became one of the big issues on how we have these gems, but we don't often put the resources towards maintaining them in the long run. And one of the things that was brought up about the reflecting pool and also about some of the vandalism that occurs in both on the statue, the usual annual pulling the feather off in the bowl and things that happen inside the burying ground. One of the things that was discussed is the possibility of putting a closed circuit camera or something up there. But I think the bigger issue is that we need to adapt cultural resources of the town so that there's money to spend on them on an annual basis. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much. Just very briefly, I agree with the sentiments just from the microphone. I would love to say that we have a big pool of money in those funds, but we don't. And just as a personal aside just to let you all know when the town meeting and this board of selection by a four to one vote was discussing the community preservation act, we were talking about especially around parks and recreational facilities as well as the town manager through the capital planning committee had identified some projects that could make the list and or fall by the wayside, which not only spoke about the gardens in the park, but also the old very own grounds. So there are some minds of foot. I'm not saying if community preservation act doesn't go through those things won't happen, but with the current confines of the budget that we have and when we get to the operating budget out to 2020, unfortunately, there are things that are prioritized and our parks and fields sort of get pushed down. So I'm not saying it's a caveat that that's going to happen, but I just wanted to bring that up. Thank you, Ms. Mohan. I think he's very well said. I think because the CPA, as we know, covers both outdoor recreation and historic resources. But I will say that when you use the word endowment, the only way endowment happens is through private effort. There's no, the town is not ever. Yeah, I just, but I mean, I hope that's inspiration for private effort because that's really the right way to do it. So I will all of this. Oh, please, sir. Shira Shirani, the other half of. Um, I hear what you said, and in fact, I expected that comment to be made tonight, but the town actually rents that property almost every weekend during the summer. There's a wedding party of some kind. So my question will be, why don't you allocate some of those funds to maintaining that property, which would be appropriate in my mind. So just so that the funds for that property are retained in a specific, um, revolving fund. And for instance, one of the things that the revolving fund was wasn't specifically maintained the park, but it did go towards replacing the clock up on the roof, which so, which you may argue is too remote from the park, but I'd argue that they're quite proximate. So definitely that that money is being used for the betterment of the properties. But yeah, and we'll follow up on that. Yeah. So I guess that, um, you know, we've meant the motion to receive the correspondence to, um, refer this, uh, particular letter to the, uh, town manager also for. Oh, I'll accept that amendment. Yeah. So I, I don't, I'd like to refer that one to the, I want to, uh, town manager, uh, trucks on Cleveland street, specifically there is, uh, we, there's two aspects of this one in my mind. One is we could send it to tack. Another one is we can send it to town manager for additional enforcement. Um, I def, I think the additional enforcement element that turns is a very appropriate. And whether or not we want to refer to tack. I leave, I just wanted to at least discuss it with, uh, the board and for the DAV, I'm hoping that, uh, the chair will see fit to put, in fact, I really think we have to put that alcohol license on our future agenda so that we can revoke it because the circumstance or discuss it. And then I will, the circumstances clearly have changed with that organization such that I'm not sure a license is appropriate anymore. So those are my, so I guess the one thing that I'm not sure about is whether or not we should talk to tack with Cleveland street. Doesn't hurt. Well, what I was going to say, just considering their request, could we first, um, I think it was sort of the avenue going down, explore through the chair with the town manager and the police department, because I know we had this, we've had this request before marathon street and I want to say Cleveland. Um, and then there's a separate issue of enforcement and again that can go through. Um, and then what I'm thinking is, um, officer or toe may say within the past five, 10 years. Okay. Look at this. And then if they didn't, it can come back to the settlement. So I'd say town manager, town manager chair would be my referrals. Okay. We fine. Okay. All those in favor of the motion? Please say aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion does carry. Um, lastly, if we have, uh, any new business, uh, Mr. Heim can wait. Is Mahan. No. Mr. Dunn. Nope. And I have no new business with that. I'll entertain a motion to, um, continue the motion. Um, let's, um, we have a adjourn understanding that, that the board ofän does remain in session during, um, the, uh, the balance of town meeting in the hall. So that we may attend to any, uh, business that, that, uh, we may be called upon to, will act town meeting business. You may be called upon. Second. Second. All those in favor? Hi, I almost forgot. I had to second that. She'll blue bin still. I'm used to just going, I must just...